Hale Moani

Property data is unanimous that the building was constructed in 1973, with 12 out of 12 listings reporting this year. No listing remarks contradict or qualify this date.

Listings include units on floors up to at least the 15th floor, and no remarks specify a different total number of stories. Following the rule to use the highest observed floor number when no explicit building count is given, the building is treated as having 15 floors.

A remark notes there are 'only five units per floor,' and property data shows at least 15 floors with residential units, implying about 75 units in the building. Because no listing explicitly states the total number of units, this is an informed estimate rather than a directly confirmed figure.

Remarks include qualitative references to owners and investors (e.g., 'Perfect for owner occupants and investors alike') but no explicit percentage. Per rules, retain the existing numeric value when remarks don't state a number; confidence is low due to lack of direct evidence.

Listings mention elevator access and fob entry but never specify how many elevators the building has. Per rules, keep the current numeric value when remarks do not state a number. Low confidence due to lack of explicit count.

Calculated from the lowest association fee observed across all non-penthouse unit listings for this building.

Calculated from the highest association fee observed across all non-penthouse unit listings for this building.

Calculated from association fees observed in penthouse unit listings for this building.

Where agents list what the maintenance covers, they consistently mention electricity, water, sewer, cable, internet, and hot water but never central A/C. With ACCEN unchecked across all MLS records, it is very likely central air conditioning is not included in the fees.

Strong evidence across listings that cable TV is included: 12 of 13 MLS records have CABTV checked and remarks repeatedly say 'basic cable TV' or 'cable TV' is included. Multiple agents independently list cable among covered utilities, indicating this is a building-level inclusion rather than an isolated error.

Moderate but consistent evidence: 11 of 13 MLS records include the OTCOEX flag, suggesting common area electricity is covered. Remarks tend to list 'electricity' among included utilities (without always specifying 'common'), so inclusion is implied across multiple agent entries.

None of the MLS records indicate cooperative taxes are included, and the building is marketed as fee simple rather than a co-op. This makes it virtually certain that cooperative taxes are not part of the maintenance fee.

High-confidence evidence that electricity is included: 12 of 13 MLS records flag ELECTR and numerous agent remarks explicitly state 'electricity' is part of the maintenance fee. The consistency across listings indicates a building-wide practice.

Agents repeatedly list what the fees cover but never reference gas service, and the GAS checkbox is unset on all MLS records. This strongly indicates gas is not included in the association fees (and likely not a significant building utility).

Multiple listings explicitly state 'hot water' is included and 11 of 13 MLS records have HOTWAT checked. The repeated agent remarks listing 'hot water' with other covered utilities provide strong evidence that hot water is included in the maintenance fee.

Remarks note “Electric, Cable, Internet, Water, Sewer” and “Maintenance Fee includes Electricity, cable TV and internet,” among others. Together with INTSER being checked on most MLS records, this shows building internet service is included in the monthly fees.

While the building fronts the Ala Wai Canal, none of the listings describe marina access or boat slips, and the MARINA inclusion flag is never used. This provides strong evidence that marina access or fees are not part of the association dues.

Very strong and consistent evidence: all 13 MLS entries have SEWER checked and many agent remarks explicitly list 'sewer' among covered utilities. The uniformity across listings supports a building-level inclusion.

Very strong evidence that water is included: 13 of 13 MLS records flag WATER and agent remarks consistently list 'water' (often paired with sewer and electricity) as part of the HOA/maintenance fee.

Multiple current public remarks (at least 7 separate unit descriptions) explicitly advertise building BBQ facilities, using phrases like "BBQ grill", "BBQ area", "community BBQ", and "BBQ deck". Historical MLS amenity data also shows 11/13 listings with BBQ and prior confidence was High, so the building-wide BBQ/common grilling amenity is well supported across agents and listings.

At least one listing explicitly lists a 'bike rack' among building amenities, indicating residents have a place to store bicycles on-site. Other listings are consistent with this and do not contradict it, supporting that the building offers bike storage as a shared amenity.

Views of the Ala Wai Canal are a selling point, but there is no suggestion of docking or boating facilities. MLS data supports the conclusion that there is no boat dock or marina amenity.

Parking is discussed (covered stalls, location), but no mention is made of car wash facilities. MLS data is consistent with there being no car wash amenity.

Amenities are consistently limited to pool, BBQ, community laundry, and bike rack; no clubhouse is ever referenced. The MLS data is fully consistent with the absence of a clubhouse.

Remarks focus on location, views, utilities-included maintenance fees, pool/BBQ, and security via video/fob, but there is no reference to any concierge or front-desk services. With 0/12 MLS indications and no textual evidence, it is highly likely there is no concierge at this building.

While the building allows pets ('PET-FRIENDLY'), there is no indication of a specific on-site dog park or run. MLS amenity data aligns with the absence of this feature.

Multiple agents emphasize 'secured' entry via video/fob and other amenities like pool, BBQ, and community laundry, but there is no mention of a staffed doorman or lobby attendant in any listing. This consistent omission alongside 0/12 DOORMA entries makes it very likely the building has no doorman service.

Across 12 listings, none reference a gym, fitness center, or exercise room. Combined with 0/12 MLS amenity checkboxes, this is strong evidence the building lacks an exercise facility.

Despite being a selling point in luxury buildings, no courtesy car or limo service is advertised here. Combined with MLS data, this strongly indicates no such service.

None of the 12 listings highlight any meeting or conference facilities, which would typically be marketed if available. MLS checkboxes also omit this feature.

Building-level outdoor spaces are consistently described across listings: at least 7 listings (matching MLS checkbox data) mention lanai/patio features with phrases like "wrap-around lanai," "80 square foot lanai," and "lanai shutters." Multiple remarks also reference shared outdoor amenities such as a "community pool and BBQ deck," indicating both private lanais and common deck/patio areas are present and the evidence is strong across different agent remarks.

Any walking or jogging is implied to be off-site along the Ala Wai area, not a controlled building feature. MLS data does not mark a jogging path amenity.

Across all 12 listings, family-oriented play amenities are never mentioned, which would be highly marketable if present. MLS data uniformly shows no playground amenity.

Across 12 listings, there are no references to a private yard, fenced yard, or enclosed ground-level outdoor space—only lanais, decks, and pool/BBQ areas typical of a high-rise. This strongly indicates the building does not offer private yard areas for units.

Although some listings mention golf course views, none claim an on-site putting green. The MLS data corroborates that no such amenity exists at this building.

Multiple agents independently reference a pool/BBQ area or deck, indicating a dedicated shared recreation deck rather than just a small grill space. With consistent MLS tagging, this supports a building-level recreation area.

Across all listings, amenities are described as pool, BBQ, community laundry, and bike rack, with no recreation or game room mentioned. MLS data also does not show a rec room, indicating it likely does not exist.

The building is marketed for its location near many restaurants, not for in-building dining. Absence of any direct claim and MLS omission indicate no on-site restaurant.

Views and outdoor space are consistently described in terms of private lanais and the pool/BBQ deck, not a rooftop. The complete absence in MLS data further indicates no shared rooftop amenity.

For a sauna, agents typically highlight it alongside pool/gym amenities, but it is never mentioned. MLS amenity fields agree that no sauna is present.

None of the 12 listings for this building mention storage lockers or extra building storage, and MLS amenities never include any storage options. The only 'storage' comments are about in-unit kitchen cabinets, suggesting there are no dedicated storage units available to residents. Based on consistent omission across all agents, this is treated as a non-existent building amenity.

I looked for 'surfboard storage', 'board storage', or similar phrases and found no references. There is no evidence in the remarks that the building provides surfboard storage.

None of the 12 listings reference tennis courts or related facilities, and MLS data uniformly omits this amenity. This strongly indicates the building does not offer tennis courts.

All current MLS records (13/13) list a trash/garbage chute and historical confidence was High, but none of the aggregated public remarks explicitly reference a trash/garbage/refuse chute. Inclusion is based on consistent MLS amenity data across listings (implied rather than directly mentioned in agent remarks).

All references to parking are to individual stalls rather than a managed service, and no listing mentions 'valet' or similar services. The combination of remarks and MLS checkbox data strongly supports that the building does not offer valet service.

Across 12 listings, agents highlight pool, BBQ, parking, and secure entry but never mention perimeter walls, fencing, or gates. The complete absence of 'gated' or 'fenced' language and 0/12 MLS flags strongly indicate there is no enclosing wall or fence system for the property.

Amenity descriptions consistently limit water features to a standard pool. The lack of any hot tub or spa reference plus MLS data indicates no whirlpool facility.

All 13 current MLS listings list a pool and numerous agent remarks explicitly reference a shared building pool (phrases include "building has a pool", "on-site pool", and "building’s sparkling pool"). Evidence is consistent across multiple listings and agents, indicating a strong, building-level shared pool amenity.

While many listings confirm the presence of a shared pool, none of the 12 current MLS entries mark it as heated and no remarks use terms like 'heated pool' or 'heated swimming pool'. The consistent lack of any 'heated' description across agents and remarks indicates the building’s pool is not heated.

The building is described as having a pool in multiple remarks, but none identify the pool as salt water. I searched for 'salt water', 'saltwater', and similar terms and found no matches.

No listing remarks reference in-unit washers or dryers, even for upgraded and penthouse units, and 0/12 MLS inclusion checkboxes indicate a washer/dryer. Multiple agents instead emphasize shared/community laundry, suggesting laundry is provided communally rather than in individual units.

High-confidence evidence that the building has shared laundry: the MLS checkbox is set on all 13 current listings and numerous public remarks explicitly state 'community laundry' (and mention it alongside other building amenities). The consistency across all listings and multiple agent remarks supports including community_laundry = true.

The remarks repeatedly list 'community laundry' as an amenity but contain no indication whether it is free or requires payment. I looked for terms such as 'coin-op', 'quarters', 'card operated', or 'paid laundry' and found none.

Multiple remarks state the building has community laundry, but none specify that laundry facilities are present on every floor. I searched for phrases like 'on each floor', 'every floor', and 'floor-by-floor laundry' and found no matches.

Every recent listing indicates the presence of at least one parking stall, with remarks such as "WITH PARKING" and "1 bed, 1 bath, 1 parking unit." MLS parking_features show that all 12 of 12 listings have a parking type selected and none indicate no parking. This strongly supports that the building offers on-site parking for residents.

Strong evidence that the building offers assigned/reserved parking: 10 of 13 current MLS records mark ASSIGN and multiple agent remarks explicitly say "reserved parking stall" or similar. Mentions appear across listings from different agents (not limited to a single copy/paste), supporting high confidence that parking is assigned for units.

Clear, consistent evidence that the building provides covered parking: 10 of 13 current MLS records indicate covered parking and multiple listings' remarks explicitly mention "covered parking" or "1 covered parking unit/spot." The repeated, consistent language across listings supports high confidence.

Listings consistently note a parking stall is included or reserved, but none explicitly state parking is deeded or part of the unit deed. Because deeded status is not specified in the remarks, parking_deeded is set to false with low confidence.

Across all provided listings, there are no references to EV charging, charging stations, or similar amenities. MLS parking_features for 12 of 12 listings omit the EVCHRG checkbox. Given this consistent absence, it is highly likely the building does not offer dedicated EV charging stations.

I searched the remarks for phrases like "parking fee," "monthly parking," or "additional parking cost" but found none. Parking_fee is unknown (null) with low confidence due to absence of information.

None of the listing remarks mention "guest parking" or "visitor parking," despite detailing other amenities such as pool, BBQ, and bike rack. Additionally, no MLS records for the 12 listings check the GUEST parking feature. This strongly suggests that formal guest parking is not available at this building.

Remarks describe a "secured building with fob entry" but do not specifically state that the parking area itself is gated or access-controlled. MLS parking_features never mark SECENT for any of the 12 listings. This pattern indicates that, while the building is secure, the parking is not clearly marketed as separately secured entry parking.

Listing remarks talk about a "large parking stall that potentially fits a car plus a motorcycle or moped" but never use terms like "tandem" or "back-to-back." The TANDEM option is unchecked in all 12 MLS entries. This makes it very likely that tandem parking is not a standard or advertised configuration in this building.

The building is described as a conventional Waikiki condo with self-use parking, and no listing mentions valet or attended parking services. MLS data also show that none of the 12 listings select the VALET option. Together, this provides very strong evidence that the building does not offer valet parking.

I searched for terms such as "parking waitlist" or "join waitlist for parking" and found no references. Given the absence of any waitlist language, parking_waitlist is set to false with low confidence.

Security is described as '24/7 video and key fob security' and 'fob entry,' but agents never say the elevator itself is keyed or requires a fob. Combined with 0/12 MLS ELEVAT checkboxes, the evidence suggests there is secure building entry but not a keyed/fob-access elevator system.

Several listings clearly describe electronic access (keyfob/fob) and secured entry, which meets the definition of card/fob access security. This explicit wording supports high confidence.

Agents repeatedly describe Hale Moani as a 'secured' or 'secure, well-managed' building but never mention a guard or on-site security personnel. With 0/12 MLS checkboxes for SECGUA and no guard-related language across remarks, this strongly indicates there is no security guard service.

While the building has video surveillance and fob access, there are no public remarks indicating an on-site or roving security patrol. I searched for 'patrol', 'roving security', and 'security guard/patrol' and found no matches.

At least 1/12 listings clearly mentions '24/7 video ... security,' providing explicit evidence of video surveillance at the building. Other remarks refer to a 'secured' or 'secure, well-managed' building, supporting the presence of a building-wide video security system despite MLS checkboxes being left blank.

No listings (0/12) indicate central AC in MLS checkboxes, and no remarks mention 'central air', 'HVAC', or similar terms. Given how prominently a building-wide system is typically marketed, this consistent absence across multiple agents and listings strongly suggests the building does not have central air conditioning.

Across 12 listings, no MLS checkbox entries (ACSPL) or remarks mention split, ductless, or mini-split AC systems. Given the number of listings and that recent upgrades are otherwise well-documented, this strongly indicates that units in the building do not have split AC systems.

MLS inclusion checkbox ACWIUN appears on 4 of 13 current listings (previously 3 of 12), indicating some units likely have window air-conditioning. No public remarks explicitly state 'window AC' or 'window unit' across the provided listings, so evidence comes mainly from multiple agents' MLS inclusions rather than explicit remarks; confidence is moderate (0.75).

All 13 current listings include 'CONCRE' in the construction_materials field (previously 12/12), and there are no remarks contradicting concrete construction. Although the public remarks do not explicitly say 'concrete,' the unanimous MLS checkbox across multiple listings/agents and prior high-confidence history provide strong corroboration that the building is concrete-constructed.

None of the 12 listings indicate double-wall construction, and the structure is repeatedly characterized as a concrete Waikiki condo tower. In Hawaii, double-wall refers mainly to wood-framed homes, which this is not. The consistent absence of this checkbox supports a negative conclusion.

All listings omit hollow tile in the construction materials, while unanimously selecting concrete instead. Remarks never mention hollow tile walls or similar. This pattern across many agents suggests hollow tile is not a defining construction type for this building.

One listing marks masonry/stucco but eleven do not, and no remarks reference stucco or masonry exteriors. The building reads as a standard concrete Waikiki tower, so the lone MASSTU entry appears to be a one-off agent selection. Overall evidence favors treating masonry/stucco as not a primary construction type here.

No listings select steel frame in the construction materials, while all instead select concrete. Remarks emphasize a standard Waikiki condo tower with nothing suggesting a steel-frame structure. Combined MLS and market norms make steel-frame construction unlikely here.

A minority (4/12) of listings check slab construction, with no remarks contradicting it, and the building is an urban concrete tower where a slab-type foundation is standard. The partial but repeated MLS marking across different listings suggests slab applies, though some agents may simply have left the box unchecked.

No analysis available

0/12 listings mark wood frame, and remarks repeatedly describe a secure, elevator-served high-rise building (penthouses, high floors, multiple units per level). Given the building type and local construction norms, wood-frame construction is highly unlikely. The absence of this checkbox across all agents supports this conclusion.

Half of the listings explicitly mark above-ground construction, and none contradict it; remarks describe high-floor and penthouse units, confirming a raised multi-story structure. While some agents do not check this box (likely omission), the combination of MLS data and building form makes above-ground construction likely applicable.

None of the listings mention or check brick construction, and the building is presented as a typical concrete Waikiki condo tower. Given local practices and the lack of any brick-related language, brick construction can be safely ruled out. Multiple independent agents omitting this box reinforces that it is not a brick building.

All listings omit single-wall construction and instead mark concrete, and the remarks describe a secure elevator building with penthouse and high-floor units. This is incompatible with traditional single-wall construction. The consistent data across many agents makes single-wall construction effectively certain to be absent.

I looked for explicit indicators of legal short-term rental allowance (NUC/TVU, "short-term rental allowed", branded hotel program, or minimum-night policies) and found none. Therefore str_allowed is false with low confidence based solely on the public remarks.

There is no public-remarks evidence of any hotel rental pool or hotel-managed rental program. Because STR is not indicated as allowed, str_hotel_pool is set to false.

No listing mentions a mandatory hotel pool or that owners must participate in a rental program. With no STR allowance indicated, str_mandatory_pool is false.

At least one listing clearly states the unit is 'fee simple,' establishing that fee simple ownership exists in this building. No other listing mentions leasehold or land lease terms, suggesting fee simple is common here.

Across all provided remarks, there are no references to leasehold or lease terms, and one unit is explicitly marketed as 'fee simple.' Given leasehold status is typically emphasized in this market, the evidence points to this being an all–fee simple building with no leasehold units noted.

The public remarks describe the property as fee simple (not leasehold), so there is no lease expiry to report. I return null for lease expiry and high confidence because fee simple was explicitly stated.

Multiple public remarks directly reference VA buyers, which is a strong indicator the building is VA-approved. I therefore mark financing_va true with high confidence based solely on the remarks.

Multiple listings explicitly mention comprehensive building-level insurance/hurricane coverage, indicating walls-in/full building insurance is in place. This is recorded as true with high confidence.

No listing remarks mention fire sprinklers, and the MLS amenity for sprinklers is unchecked on all 12 listings. This consistent absence strongly suggests the building does not have a marketed fire sprinkler system.

I searched all remarks for explicit language indicating the building passed a fire/life safety evaluation (e.g., 'FLSE passed', 'fire safety certified', 'passed fire inspection') and found none. In absence of any mention, this is recorded as false with medium confidence.

Flood zone determined from official FEMA Digital Flood Insurance Rate Map (DFIRM) data using building coordinates, not from agent-reported listing data.

No analysis available

At least one listing's public remarks explicitly state 'breathtaking OCEAN...views', and historical data previously indicated strong evidence for ocean views. While the structured MLS view_descriptions currently show 0/13 with OCEAN (possible checkbox omission), agent remarks across listings still reference ocean views, so the building offers ocean-view units.

Nearly every listing highlights mountain aspects: 'Ko'olau Mountains', 'island mountain View', 'canal/mauka views', and 'mountain vistas'. Both remarks and MLS tags consistently confirm that many units in the building enjoy strong mountain views.

A high-floor corner listing explicitly mentions 'Diamond Head views' and again lists 'Diamond Head with sunrise' among its view corridors. This, along with one MLS Diamond Head tag, confirms that some units in the building do enjoy Diamond Head views.

City views are repeatedly mentioned in remarks (e.g., 'City, mountain, and canal views', 'sparkling city lights'), and 2/13 current MLS view_descriptions include CITY. Multiple agents describe city views, indicating the building offers units with city vistas.

Agents describe an 'OCEAN' view in one case but never characterize it as a 'coastline' or 'shoreline' view, and no MLS entries use a coastline tag. This suggests the building offers ocean glimpses rather than expansive coastline views as a defining feature.

Listings consistently promote canal, mountain, city, ocean, golf course, and Diamond Head views but never mention garden, courtyard, or landscaped views. Given the building’s urban/canal frontage and complete absence of such remarks, units with true garden views are unlikely.

One or more public remarks explicitly include 'golf course' as part of the view (e.g., '...Ala Wai Canal, golf course, sparkling city lights...'). Combined with prior high-confidence historical data, this supports that some units have golf course views even if the current MLS checkboxes do not reflect it.

Numerous remarks mention 'Ala Wai Canal' or 'canal' and CURRENT MLS view_descriptions list MARCAN in 4/13 listings. Multiple agents consistently advertise Ala Wai Canal/harbor views, so the building clearly offers marina/canal views.

Public remarks explicitly reference 'Diamond Head with sunrise' and morning sun/lanai coffee, and 1/13 current MLS view_descriptions include SUNRIS. This corroborated evidence indicates some units provide sunrise/eastern exposure views.

Despite extensive marketing of views (mountain, canal, city lights, ocean, golf course, Diamond Head with sunrise), there are no references to sunsets or evening western exposure. This persistent omission suggests sunset views are not a selling feature for this building’s units.

There are zero references to any cemetery view despite very detailed view marketing in the remarks and no MLS cemetery view tags. Considering the known urban/canal surroundings, it's safe to conclude the building does not offer cemetery views.

I searched for explicit references to 'fireworks', 'Friday night fireworks', or 'watch fireworks from' and found no mentions. There is no evidence that units have fireworks views.

No analysis available

No analysis available

Multiple independent agents describe the building as 'PET-FRIENDLY' and 'pet-friendly', and there are no contrary restrictions mentioned. This provides strong evidence that the building allows pets, likely with standard condo rules rather than a blanket prohibition.

A majority of current MLS entries (8 of 13 listings) list RESMAN in building amenities, and prior analysis rated this feature High confidence. None of the public remarks explicitly state 'resident manager' or 'on-site manager,' but given consistent MLS checkbox usage across multiple listings and no strong contradictory evidence, the building is reported to have a resident/on-site manager.

Listings market the property as a conventional Waikiki condominium suitable for primary residents and long-term investors, with no hotel branding or front-desk/rental-pool language. The absence of any condotel terminology across many listings indicates it is not operated as a condotel.

The building is repeatedly referred to as a fee simple condominium without any mention of cooperative structure or share-based ownership. Both the wording in remarks and the MLS fee coding support that this is not a co-op building.